Key facts
- The US Court of International Trade will hear a challenge to President Donald Trump's tariffs on goods from 60 trading partners on Wednesday.
- The tariffs, imposed in late July, range from 10% to 12.5% and cover more than 99% of goods imported into the United States.
- Four small businesses and 25 Democratic-led states argue the tariffs exceed the president's authority.
- The Supreme Court ruled against most of Trump's widest-ranging tariffs on February 20, finding the president cannot use emergency economic powers to unilaterally impose tariffs on all US trading partners.
- Trump responded by imposing a temporary 10% global tariff under a different US law, which expired before he invoked another legal authority for the current tariffs.
The US Court of International Trade is set to hear a challenge on Wednesday to tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump on goods from 60 trading partners, which the administration claims are failing to prevent imports made with forced labor. Opponents argue these tariffs exceed the president's authority and revive unchecked tariff powers that the Supreme Court previously struck down in February.
Four small businesses and 25 Democratic-led states are challenging the tariffs, contending they apply to goods from the EU and China and far exceed the president's legal authority. A panel of three judges, appointed by Presidents Trump, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, will preside over the case, with a written ruling expected after the hearing.
Tariffs have been a central element of Trump's foreign policy, used as a negotiation tool. However, the Supreme Court's February ruling limited his ability to unilaterally impose tariffs on all US trading partners using emergency economic powers. Following this decision, Trump initially imposed a temporary 10% global tariff under a different law, which expired before he invoked another legal authority to implement the current forced labor tariffs.
These tariffs, implemented in late July, range from 10% to 12.5% and affect over 99% of goods imported into the United States. Three consolidated lawsuits argue that such tariffs require country-specific findings of unfair trade practices for legal justification. The lawsuits claim that the administration is using "forced labor" as a pretext to regain unfettered global tariff power, which US courts have previously rejected, rather than conducting genuine investigations.